QtPlasmaC VS plasmaC

What is the difference between the two?

QTplasmac is the active version moving forward. Plasmac won't be supported other than bug fixes..

Wow!!! I can’t keep up lol. So is it worth switching?

rodw wrote: QTplasmac is the active version moving forward. Plasmac won't be supported other than bug fixes..

I thought QtPlasmaC was the GUI, and PlasmaC was the underlying component.

is that not the case?

so QtPlasmaC (the GUI / front end) runs without a hal component?

robertspark wrote:

rodw wrote: QTplasmac is the active version moving forward. Plasmac won't be supported other than bug fixes..

I thought QtPlasmaC was the GUI, and PlasmaC was the underlying component.

is that not the case?

so QtPlasmaC (the GUI / front end) runs without a hal component?

QtPlasmaC is a GUI (+ config) that uses the plasmac component.

PlasmaC is a set of VCP panels added to either the Axis GUI or Gmoccapy GUI (+ config) that uses the plasmac component.

Note: config refers to HAL connections plus helper files

Clear as mud...

motal2004 wrote: What is the difference between the two?

Browsing the two manuals may help you a bit at least visually:

QtPlasmaC

PlasmaC

In addition to what the others have already said, QtPlasmaC is a bit more seamless than PlasmaC loaded on top of Axis or Gmoccapy were since it's a purpose-built GUI.

Just a few noteworthy additions off the top of my head:

• The Z axis DRO now displays relative to the material during cutting
• There is an option to add a button that will trace the job you're about to cut at the extents (essentially draw a frame around it to see if any part is outside the material)
• The ability to keep Z movements in a gcode file (in case you want to run a marker or similar)
• The Z axis will automagically go near the top of travel when starting a job, before any X Y movements are made
• Material alignment/X0Y0 via a laser
• Material alignment/X0Y0 via a camera